Seniority
May 21st, 2010 | By admin | Category: Seniority
Integrating seniority is never easy. In Continental’s history there have been several seniority integrations, some of which were unilaterally implemented by the Lorenzo-led company when there weren’t any contracts in effect. The IAM is committed to integration of seniority in a way that is fair and equitable for all flight attendants.
One common method of integration is “dovetailing” seniority. That would be to integrate by your current Continental date of hire into the flight attendant classification. Whatever Continental seniority date you have today, as well as United flight attendants seniority dates, would be merged into a single list by date of hire.
Historically, the IAM’s seniority integration policy has been to integrate by the current date of hire into the specified classification (dovetailing). However, the IAM recognizes that sometimes issues arise that require more consideration than a simple dovetailing. The IAM will create seniority integration committees made up of representatives from both pre-merger airlines to resolve seniority disputes when they arise. If agreements cannot be reached, the issues will be submitted to a neutral arbitrator for resolution.
The IAM has a history of protecting seniority in mergers – that is not the case for all unions. For example, when United bought Pan Am’s Pacific routes in 1985, AFA argued before a neutral arbitrator that Pan Am flight attendants should be stapled to the bottom of the combined seniority list.
In contrast, when US Airways and America West merged, the IAM’s merger policy protected the seniority dates of employees at both carriers, even if they were formerly members of another union.
How seniority is used is a matter of collective bargaining and would need to be addressed in negotiations with United following a merger and resolving representation issues.
The Machinists union will not be able to enforce a fair and equitable merger policy if we are not your representative post-merger.
You can print a SENIORITY flyer below.
The Machinists Union understands how important seniority is to flight attendants, and seniority has been lost in mergers where the IAM did not represent flight attendants after a merger.
We understand that flight attendant seniority integration is not so simple that it can be implemented by a firm and inflexible policy. There are many unique issues that weigh on how seniority should be implemented, and we have received and closely read the many comments and suggestions flight attendants have provided.
Date of Hire in a merged seniortiy list is fine. The fact remains though that Uniteds Flight Attendants are Senior and that would lead to a top heavy list with Uniteds flight attendants being on the top and Continentals on the bottom. A “relative seniority” list maybe a better option where flight attendants would hold about the same lines in a merged company as they are now at there respective companies.
Why should I be bumped down by someone that started working for and airline several years AFTER I did?
Put it this way, had CAL merged with SWA, and went with Relative Senority, that would have put a SWA F/A of 10 years ahead of a CAL F/A of 20 years, does’nt sound very fair to me..
Hi Paul, I am sorry we can’t give them a option here, they are gaining a pay increase than more than 20% on all their salaries, we will get nothing, if lucky maybe a dolar, therefore we need more than anything we must fight for our seniority to be integrated by RELATIVE, exemple ,
co seniority new united\co integrated by date of hire our % now new united\co by relative seniority
PAUL 7183 20970 77% 77% = 19079
LUIS 6316 19350 68% 68% = 16849
by relative integration your new number will flutuate by 1 to 2% give or taken .
Now do u know how long will take you to gain 1900 positions in seniority??????
think about it. This is pure math, feel free to contact me
thank you
Yes, the Iam has a great record protecting flight attendants seniority. Just ask their former members of TWA how true that is.
Dear Gentlemen
I kindly request you consider Relative Seniority as a method to combine the Continental Airlines F/A integration with the upcomming merger with United Airlines. Over 57% of Cal’s F/A’s have been hired after 1996. Continental Airlines has around 8900 active F/A’s and United Airlines has more than 6600 more F/A’s than CAL. Its almost 2 to 1 ratio in favor of United Airlines. Your CAL IAM f/A’s have worked very hard over the past 15 years along with other CAL employees to help make this company what it is today. Straight DOH with an adjustment for our training date is not fair and equitable for CAL F/A’s. Please consider Relative Seniority.
I thank You for your time in this matter.
Patrick O’Brien
C5657
The Flight Attendants have been working very hard for the last few years at United. Working longer hohurs for less pay. I understand that Continental employees went thru some very tuff years, and came out on top. For that i say congratulations, YOU DESERVE IT!!!! But I will also say that relative senority is not something I want. For the most part, it would put someone on the senority list ahead of me, that did not start working for an airline, until several years after I started my carrier.
Put it this way, had CAL merged with SWA, and went with Relative Senority, that would have put a SWA F/A of 10 years, ahead of a CAL F/A of 20 years….Does not really sound fair to me, of if that would have happened, fair to any CAL F/A
I want the IAM to consider Relative or weighted seniority integration. Seniority is a percentage based on movement and date of hire. Not soley date of hire. I want these percentages to be considered when merging our work groups as they are for the pilots work groups. Relative Seniority IS “Fair and Equitable” (Allegheny Mohawk Sects 3 and 13)
Hi,
This is my 4th attempt to contact and I have received no reply or aknowledgement.
I do appreciate this new page. However, there NEEDS to be a forum for our members and also include YOU, our union. I find it irresponsible to NOT have such a medium. I really feel that you are leaving thousands of members FLOUNDERING.
If you are not already lurking on facebook, go check out the group “vote for relative seniority” and also the infamous United/Continental Solidarity group.
We need answers FASTER in this day and age.
I have asked 3 other times via 3 different ‘contact” tabs throughout the Iamdl142 website….What are you going to do to aggressively campaign UAL flight attendants?? Whatever it is, I really hope you are working VERY hard preparing.
Please excuse my curt tone, I am frustrated by you ignoring me.
Regards,
Cari Kershaw
CAL 78157
My concern is weather or not the IAM will fairly represent its current Continental Flight Attendants members or will the IAM try and win the the much larger number of Flight Attendant votes at United.
Date of hire is not acceptable to most Continental Flight Attendants. I have see United’s seniority list and they are to senior for date of hire to be fair for most Continental Flight Attendants. United Flight Attendants could get pay raises, pensions, and better work rules. What would Continental Flight Attendants be offered? A fair seniority list is the only thing that could be offered. Date of hire is not fair.
After reading numerous opinions on how our two groups should be integrated. I am intrested in relative seniority as an option. The DOH method has some f/a’s with training date as doh, date you came on line etc as your start date. How can we then accept DOH as the way to go, if it represents different things? Need some clarification on how that will be handled. At this point in time relative senority sounds like my best option. Thanks!
I certainly hope IAM is reading these messages and works to represent those of us that are paying dues to you. Relative seniority is the only method of merging seniority lists that is acceptable to my “brothers and sisters”. I am concerned about date of hire at CAL being the day we went on line versus date of training which I understand to be United’s basis for seniority. Already we’re behind! My training date was in January with a “hire date” in April. I feel the United F/As are getting a stacked deck in their favor. Please remember who you are presently working for instead of the increased numbers you will get if you sell us out, expecting UA to choose you. FYI- you are doing yourselves a great dis service as they don’t think our contract is all that sweet. They clearly understand and desire countless work rules their AFA union has negotiated for them over the years. While it is true that we have a low expectation for the CAL board of directors to concern themselves with our day to day work needs; is it so very far fetched that we do expect our IAM union to step up to the plate on the issue most critical to the success of both CAL F/A needs as well as IAMs’ survivability.
Date of Hire is the only method that ought to be considered in merging the seniority lists of the two companies. Of course, CAL DoH would have to be adjusted to allow for the training weeks that UAL F/A’s are credited with, and lateral transfers within the company would need to have separate seniority dates – one, the original date of hire, for vacation accrual and retirement etc, and the other, inflight training DoH for bidding and pay.
Any other resolution to this issue would create a tremendous amount of animosity, especially if, for example, a 10-year CAL flight attendant was credited with more seniority than a 14-year UAL F/A. I’m really getting tired of people saying that they’ve put in their time and paid their dues as if UAL employees had not.
The first issue that needs to be addressed is the CAL FA’s DOH. It has been determined too many different ways. ALL CAL FAs need to have their seniority dates adjusted to their first day of training.
I personally feel that DOH is the only fair way to go. There are way too many bases of unequal seniority. No one is going to get a huge windfall of seniority by DOH. Everyone gets credit for the amount of work put in. We have all worked hard and been a great airline at one time or another.
Let me put it this way, if CAL had merged with SWA, would you be asking for weighted or relative seniority then? That would put a SWA FA with 10 Years ahead of a CAL FA with 20. Doesn’t sound very fair to me.
I am relatively junior at United and would like to see senority by hire date. To me that seems fair. Any Union House that I have worked for has always gone by hire date.
Considering the the size and age difference between CO and UA, I sincerely think that relative seniority is a much fairer way of preserving the working conditions and career progression that we have built for ourselves here at CAL. DOH would have CAL heavily weighted towards the bottom of the seniority list. It would have a very negative impact on our quality of life and potential earning power that we are used to. Relative seniority has been implemented by the Delta/Northwest pilot groups. It’s also the way ALPA plans to integrate our CAL pilots with UA’s. If Relative seniority is considered fair in regards all four of those pilot groups, I can’t see why there’s a double standard when it comes to FAs. DOH hurts us, relative seniority will not hurt UAL FAs, or give CAL FAs “super seniority”. The whole idea is to maintain a status quo and preserve our “relative” place in the new company in this merger of equals. I know the IAM is eyeing the possibility of being the FA union of the new successor company, and I’m concerned that they may not pursue relative seniority due to the fear of alienating the 16000 FAs at UAL. But the IAM has a responsibility to represent us and look out for our best interest, both in regards to the company and the other flight attendant group. I’m hoping that the IAM upholds it’s lawful responsibility of “duty of fair representaion” in regards to this matter. Otherwise arbitration will be necessary.
Please consider relative seniority!! It’s the only fair way!!! Does anybody answer these comments?
DOH is only way to go with seniority integration. Time served, time earned! It is also the only way to avoid people jr to others to all of a sudden become sr those same other people. If IAM wants UA f/a’s to choose them to represent the combined groups, which I think there’s a chance, the way to persuade them is to do what is regular practice and fair, such as DOH.
Seniority by date of hire would be unfair to CO flight attendants and beneficial to UA flight attendants because they have many more FAs than we do. We have hired FAs recently and they have not so as a new hire I would always be at the bottom of the list. At Co it is not so bad because I hold a line. At UA I will never get anywhere. Please do weighted seniority, not hire date.
Thank you.
Continental Flight Attendants are at a unique airline. Since there are such fewer there then UAL, The Flight Attendants hold International much sooner, then us at United…As an example, out of Newark, CAL can hold International lines at about 3 to 4 years senority. Where as at United, I started in 1998, and am still on roataion(holding a “domestic” line one month and being on reserve the next). That is pretty much the same at any of the other major airlines, except Continental. I know that it is a sinsitive area with my new co-workers at Continental, but in reality, DOH would just bring CAL F/As into the quality of life that the rest of the industry has been at for years. If I were a Continental FA, I would want Relative Senority to protect my international flying at such a junior senority. So I totally understand why CAL want’s Relative Senority. BUt at the same time, had the tables been turned on a CAL/SWA merge with relative senority, I have a feeling CAL would be screaming for DOH. EG; if CAL merged with SWA and went with relative senority, and 10 year SWA flight Attendant would go ahead of a 20 year CAL flight Attendant..does not sound fair to me
Hi, I posted earlier and it seems to be deleted. I think relative seniority is the only FAIR way. I’ve been with CAL for 20 years. I hope the IAM does right by its Flight Attendants!
Hi, I posted earlier and it seems to be deleted. I think relative seniority is the only FAIR way. I’ve been with CAL for 20 years. I hope the IAM does right by its Flight Attendants!
Please consider relative seniority!! It’s the only fair way!!! Does anybody answer these comments?
This merger is not of equals if DOH is used by UA. How can our union just sit and even contemplate DOH when half our workforce was hired after 1995?! This makes absolutly no sense to throw us under the bus and have UA FA’s receive DOH. IAM listen to our voices and not your fat wallets!! Represent us now and don’t sell down the river! Relative Senority is the way to make this merger partner of equals.
Relative Seniority is the method tha best fits the definition of “Fair & Equitable”. This is the only method of seniority integration that I am in support of.
Part of negotiating ‘fair and equitably’ is considering CAREER EXPECTATION. If both carriers were to stand alone, ask the question ‘what is the career expectation of United Airlines Flight Attendants’? And the same question for Continental Airlines Flight Attendants.
Continental does not have the major over staffing issue that United does. United is not scheduled to recieve new equipment until 2016.
Cintinental is recieving new aircraft next year, showing GROWTH. CONTINENTAL flight attendants will EXPECT to move up in seniority as a result of our projected GROWTH.
Considering the above, it is fair to integrate seniority at a weighted percentage of where we are or will be at the time of operating as a single carrier. 20% of CAL fa’s are 5 yrs and junior. Over 50% are 10 years and junior and 90% are only 25 years and junior.
You do NOT want 9000 of us at CAL to persuade the 15000 to vote against you as our representation.
Many also feel it would be fair for ‘as a condition’ to a seemless integration for United to find their own way to create a more efficient staffing . Provide their own earlyouts, etc. BEFORE our most junior fa’s are tacked on the bottom of the list.
Regards.
Did the IAM protect it’s dues paying member F/A’s for TWA when they were stapled to the bottom of American’s F/A seniority list? NO!
The size of an airline is a pretty weak argument. Everyone should get credit for all of the time you have been a flight attendant. Just because UAL is bigger than CAL doesn’t mean there will be an advantage in DOH.
I left a comment this morning regarding the fact that the IAM did not protect it’s dues paying TWA F/A’s with the American Airlines takeover. The TWA F/A’s were stapled to the bottom of American F/A’s seniority list. My comment was removed. It appears that my 1st Amendment rights have now been violated by the union that takes my money every month, on the website that is funded by my and every other CAL F/A’s money.
The Machinists Union understands how important seniority is to flight attendants, and seniority has been lost in mergers where the IAM did not represent flight attendants after a merger.
We understand that flight attendant seniority integration is not so simple that it can be implemented by a firm and inflexible policy. There are many unique issues that weigh on how seniority should be implemented, and we have received and closely read the many comments and suggestions flight attendants have provided.
The Machinists Union will ensure that flight attendants have a voice in the seniority integration process. It is the IAM’s firm position that no flight attendant should lose seniority as a result of the merger.
As I see it relative seniority or something better is the only option IAM should be pursuing. The IAM should consider that CAL FA’s are the only group they represent at this time. I believe we are well aware of the integration options. We need the next union bulletin to state, specifically, on behalf of CAL FA’s, what their position is going into merging the seniority lists.
Where did my comment go? IAM … are you sensoring this forum?
No, the IAM is not censoring the forum. Differing opinions are welcome and can be viewed by everyone. However, comments are moderated to ensure inappropriate comments (personal attacks, profanity, business advertisements, spam, etc.) are not posted, and therefore your post may not appear immediately.
Negotiating Contract. If the IAM wants to represent the flight attendant group (United and CAL) they are going to have to negotiate United’s work rules in our new contract. I feel UAL flight attendants won’t vote for CAL’s contract without their good work rules incorporated in our contract.
One of many touchy subjects. My biggest concern is seniority. Which for us at Cal i think it boils down to is just how far we are from the reserve line, and or the absolute bottom being furlough fodder. DOH is the accepted practice and ok I can see that as fair if both groups are the same size and the companies started up at the same time. But something has to be said for having the same lifestyle one enjoyed prior to the merger. For that reason given the size of Ual’s group and ours a relative seniority integration is Fair its what the pilots have agreed to and makes sense. I say look at it this way if you were in the middle getting 16 days off and being at little jeopardy for going back to reserve you should still be in this position post merge +/- a day. If you are at the top getting your first choice of line i think you should still be in that position. If you are on the other end feeling the ax over your head well sorry unfortunately someone has to be there and we all were at one time or another. There will be heated debate over this obviously just from reading this forum I’ve seen it in these comments already just remember we’ll all have to work together once its done lets try to remember its management that really wants us for bottom dollar so lets try to avoid doing their dirty work for them by tearing each other apart.
UAL work rules are far from good they have just been beaten into submission. CAL FA’s have a the best contract in the industry even though it does have plenty of room for improvements. A fair way to intregrate seniority is to do relative seniority like the pilots are going to do.
As a flight attendant for United Airlines, i can tell you that i don’t feel that the Cal F/A contract is better then the one i have now through AFA. The Cal flight attendants make more money then we do but our work rules are better and give us much more protection from the abuses of our management. The amount of money i make now is a result of the loss of my pension and the 35% pay cut that i took to keep my company alive during our recent bankruptcy. I willingly made these sacrifices because of the pride i felt working for one of the premier airlines at the time. As a flight attendant with 13 years under my belt and having sacrificed a lot to get to this point i hardly think it would be fair to have Continental flight attendants with 10 years seniority leap frog ahead of me and push me even further down the senority list. Are all the sacrifices i made to help United get to this point of merger to be completly ignored? We have all worked hard in our respective companies and we all deserve to have our seniority protected. We all have to come to the realization that we will be forming a new company from the merger of two seperate ones and that things will change. Things will not be the same and we have to be willing to acccept that, otherwise we will only be fighting among ourselves. I don’t care what company you have worked for,10 years seniority is still only worth ten years seniority. We at United feel that we have one of the best contracts when it comes to work rules, money is a secondary issue, which we will improve with our current and future contact negotiations. As for the fear that many of you at Continental are feeling concerning the lose of your current lifestyle and bidding power, doesn’t that really depend on where you are based?? Most Flight Attendants here at United are not in the least bit interested in being based at any of your domiciles ! ( no offense ) In 1997 I was offered a job at Continental and one at United. I choose United because it was the better airline at the time and offered many more opportunites in terms of domiciles. In this respect i think you are getting the better end of the deal. You can be based in London, Narita, JFK or Los Angeles, so your options are wide open. I can understand the anger and can see the determination within your workgroup to keep things the same and i respect that, but keep in mind that i also will fight to maintain my seniority as i feel that we have all earned our current seniority and must respect that. One group if not any better then the other. Relative seniority is not something that the AFA worked hard to fight for, Date of hire seniority was, that is what the Mckatskill-Bond act protects. Everyone’s seniority is taken into consideration and you will be placed exactly where you deserve to be. Nothing More, Noting Less!
The issue of the Pan Am Seniority arbitration being used here seems a bit disingenuous. Especially since the AFA has since revised its Constitution and Bylaws many years ago to prevent that type of scenario from occurring again. The Pan Am route acquisition took place in 1986. The Pan Am flight attendants chose to come to United as part of the route acquistion or stay with Pan Am. To be fair nobody was happy with the Arbitration and AFA codified an explicit policy where AFA advocates for Date of Hire Integration merger into its Constitution and Bylaws, and has pledged to following its policies fully in the CO/UA merger. According to the policy, before it is finalized any employee can challenge their place on the list if they feel it is incorrect. AFA also strongly advocated for the McCaskill Act which forbade the stapling of one group of employees to another list in a merger or acquisition after the debacle of the AA/TWA acquisition whereby IAM flght attendants were stapled to the bottom of the AA APFA union seniority list. I am all for factual information and this article seems to be stirring the pot and lacking substance.
As a condition of this merger, THE CONTRACTS need to be ratified! Jeff Smisek and his team need to start grooming UAL for our way of management relationship : DIGNITY AND RESPECT! United fa’s especially need to be shown some respect, respect they have not been given for years. Give them a respectable contract NOW! Then, BEFORE this merger , offer a good earlyout from BOTH airlines. THEN, a proper seniority integration should happen.
In my opinion , it’s almost time to stop offering COLA’s and voluntary furloughs…. It’s time for EARLY OUTS! It’s time to weed out who’s staying and who’s going with respectable earlyout programs. The combined group is WAY overstaffed.
I hope this merger does not even get approved. We, at CAL, will do better without United.
By your own administrative statement, “It is the IAM’s firm position that no FA should lose seniority as a result of the merger”, IAM should NOT advocate DOH for integration. Why? Ual uses 1st day of training for DOH, CAL uses graduation day from training; there’s 6 weeks disadvantage right there for CAL FA’s. CAL loses. Secondly, UAL has the sheer numbers of fas on their side, CAL loses. DOH would not give CAL parity in that regard. Relative seniority gives CAL and UAL a truer and fairer reflection of the time spent at each others airline in a merged airline. DOH ,in this situation, is not “dovetailing” it will cause “leap frogging”.
Ugh! I don’t want ANYTHING to do with UA. I find the way they treat their employees reprehensible. If we must do this thing, then let us keep our work rules, relative seniority, and NO SLC bidding. I don’t know how we can achieve that. Looks like we have our work cut out for us.
I believe the IAM is censoring this forum. IAM administration had posted a statement saying” It is the IAM’s firm position that no fa should lose seniority as a result of the merger”. That statement has been removed from the forum after I commented how CAL fa’s were on the losing side of a DOH seniority integration rather than use a parity approach with relative seniority, due to #1 the sheer number of top heavy UAL fa’s vs CAL and #2 UAL fa’s seniority date starts on the first day of training vs CAL fa’s on graduation day ( a 6 week difference). My previous comment has been removed also. IAM should not censor legitimate info that fa’s can use to make their decisions with.
The statement you are referring to remains at the top of this forum, unchanged from when it was posted. It also appears as comment number 25.
The IAM is not censoring this forum. Differing opinions are welcome and can be viewed by everyone. However, comments are moderated. Although YOU will see your post immediately, it won’t be seen by others until it is moderated to ensure inappropriate comments (personal attacks, profanity, business advertisements, spam, etc.) are not posted. When you post, there is a notation that indicates your comments are awaiting moderation.
To date, all comments submitted have been posted and none have been deleted.
I really do not think it is fair the UA fa’s come on this board and post comments stating that they are for DOH. This is a CAL board. Coming on here acting as though you are a CAL fa and you are for DOH is wrong. This board has been posted on a UAL message board for all of them to see.
RELATIVE SENIORITY is the only fair way. If UAL was the size of CAL it would be a whole different ball game but they are not. UAL fa are gaining plenty from this merger why should we have to be punished and them rewarded.
I’m sorry Jen, but as a United Flight attendant i would like to know what advantages i am getting from this merger exactly? Can you clarify this for me please? I can’t see what rewards i will be getting from this whole merger thing. Many feel that we should not merge and i totally agree!! If we merge I will be pushed further down the seniority list and i will stay on rotation for any even longer period of time (despite my 13 years at United). Now you want to put people who are Junior to me ahead of me and call it fair? Is this truly fair and equitable? There is nothing that you have that we can not fight for ourselves through our contract negotiations. As for work rules I feel that we have the better contract, we also have so many more domiciles here at United then you do at Continental. What we don’t have is a competent CEO but he is dying to leave and WILL GET A HUGE BONUS AND GOLDEN PARACHUTE when he does decide to abandon ship. Unfortunately, he tricked your company into thinking that we wanted to merge with US airways when that was the furthest thing from our CEO’s mind. Everyone at United knew that he didn’t not want to merge with US Air, he wanted to scare Continental into coming to the table. And guess what it happened!! So now we are stuck with a merger that many don’t want but that we are going to have to live with. Knowing this, lets all be fair and equitable to each other and respect all the hard work that we have all put in to keep our companies strong and viable!!
Fair and equitable = relative seniority. The IAM represents the CO fa’s and it’s time that you stand up for us, and not take the easy way out with DOH.
Relative seniority is the only fair and equitable seniority integration that I am in favor of. I will vote against DOH. I am a CAL F/A in my 19th year. In a merger of equals, I would like to retain being in the top 25% seniority wise, not pushed down any further.
I wonder if the IAM is the least bit concerned about Continental Flight Attendants or are they so eager to get United Flight Attendants on board with them that they would throw us under the bus. I have been told by a union rep that seniority isn’t everything. Well when I was in training that was the one thing that we were told. Seniority Is Everything. This is starting to feel like it’s a take over rather than a “merger of equals”. I am extremely upset that in order for me to get info on our merger I have to google it because our reps do not have any answers that weren’t in a scripted. Our dues are not just for grievances the IAM must fight for us or we will go over to AFA .
The Machinists Union understands how important seniority is to flight attendants, and seniority has been lost in mergers where the IAM did not represent flight attendants after a merger.
We understand that flight attendant seniority integration is not so simple that it can be implemented by a firm and inflexible policy. There are many unique issues that weigh on how seniority should be implemented, and we have received and closely read the many comments and suggestions flight attendants have provided.
The Machinists Union will ensure that flight attendants have a voice in the seniority integration process. It is the IAM’s firm position that no flight attendant should lose seniority as a result of the merger.
The constitution and by-laws of the AFA states that DOH, in the event of a merger/acqiuision(regardless if the partner is another AFA carrier or not) is how the new contract will be handled. Good mor some, not good for others – but, if the IAM wants the support of the UAL flight attendants, then we all have to work together on a single DOH seniority list. Let’s fight for a good early-out for those who will not be happy with this merger anyway.
A question regarding DOH what happens to the FA’s that started in another department ie ramp. gate catering and have a seniority of 10 years with that department but have a 3 year seniority as a FA . Do they now leapfrog ahead of FA’s who have been with the company as FA’s for 10 years. No one seems to have an answer to that.
Typically, seniority in any other classification is not used for any competitive flight attendant purposes, such as bidding on schedules and bidding for vacation slots.
Seniority is a big issue and choosing a union to represent us all in a post merger scenario is another huge issue. I like the IAM’s stance on retirement protection, but I would like to see where my name falls on a seniority integration list with both a DOH and relative seniority scenario. To ask for support without this information by either union is risky. However, if a relative list will not benefit the UAL flight attendants why would they vote for the IAM? We all need to see where our name falls before we pledge support. Don’t forget we have all been doing the same job for years – just for different companies. Now we are being forced to intergate our groups. I believe that if the IAM pledges to implement a DOH scenario, then they will win the vote. If the IAM chooses to implement anything else, then the AFA stands a greater chance of victory. I say this only because there is more voting numbers at UAL and seniority is the key issue. The IAM needs to win the support of the UAL flight attendants, not isolate them by offering them less then what they already have. This is a merger, not a situation where one company is aquiring the other and therefore making one employee group feel lucky to have a job in a post merger. Todd
I believe in relative seniority just like our pilots. We do the same job as F/A’s but we dont WORK for the same KIND of airline. At Continental I was told I would not be on reserve long and I would be able to enjoy flexible work rules and make money. I choose CAL for that reason. WHY SHOULD MY BIDDING POWER BE TAKEN AWAY? I have earned it !! I have stuck out and have a place in my companies system seniority. I dont have a problem if pass travel goes by DOH but not MY BIDDING. I am a former People Express fa adjusted to 86 hire at CAL . I am at 15% system seniority if you go straight down the list from our #1 most senior f/a and work down the list. My UAL counterpart is at 45% with the same DOH. I put in the time. I am not taking anything from anyone. Why should they take my bidding power? I enjoy 21 days off. Why should I only have 12 or 15 or worse be on reserve. Why should they take what I have worked so hard for away? To suffer like those at UNITED have. Thats not fair nor is it equitable to be equitable we need our relative seniority. I hope this merger does not happen.
Omar, I too am an ’86 hire. At United I am approximatly #4400 out of 16,000. You wrote that your counterpart is at 45%. I’m guessing that you mean that an ’86 hire at United would have 45% of flight attendants senior to them and 55% junior to them. As you can see I actually have 25% senior to me and 75% junior to me. I just wanted to clarify. Also, I don’t think that CAL flight attendants need to be worried about their “bidding power”. UAL flight attendants are not going to rush to EWR, IAH, or CLE. Our best flying is out of IAD, ORD, and SFO and I’m sure the flight attendants based there have no intention of transfering to any of CAL’s three bases.